If the Cell is "teh powah" how comes that...

What was the cell made for if not for games?

cell was not made just for gaming, yes cell is powerful but some people fail to see its not built exclusively for gaming it has other functionsmingo123

Bingo.

I was with you until you said never..thats just unrealistic! For years sounds about right though. Pro_wrestler

read the () it sais SCALE I guess that the RAM in PS3 wont grow by itself over the years so no Crysis like deph of field game ....

theres onyl 1 reason why consoles arent getting crysis...lack of ram. the CPUs and GPUs in both the 360 and PS3 could run most of the tech in the crysis engine at high settings. the problem is that the levels and the level of detail ion every level in crysis take up a huge amount of data. if it had smaller levels and maybe slightly less detailed textures then the consoles could probably have a good stab at it.

it wouldnt surprise me in the slightest to see games based on the crysis engine for the 360 and PS3. the levels will just be smaller and more tightly knit and the textures may take a small hit in detail so they can fit. but the game would still look very pretty.

its a content, not a technology problem.

in saying that, PCs will still be running the tech better (higher reses and huge amouts of aa anf AF hardware permiting) but consoles will certainly put up a good show.

What was the cell made for if not for games?

Dahaka-UK

...Multi threaded processing?....The Cell wasnt made FOR the ps3...

The Cell just like the Xenos are both extremely stripped down processors to decrease production costs and beable to make them affordable.

If would would take a Cell processor clocked at 3.2ghz but built for the PC, it would run circles around the PS3 one. Just like my Duo Core runs circles around the Xenos in the 360.

They still have extreme amounts of power, but to keep costs down they have to strip them down considerably.

a $170 CPU http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115030 maxes Crysis? If the Cell was so strong in games applications then Crysis would require a Quad core....and as we see theer wont be a game that comes even close to Crysis in sheer calculations (Physics/AI/destructable enviroment/scale) in the next 5 years or even never I cant not be surprised how things changed since 2000 and PS2...then the first P4 costed $900 and was under heavy load to compare to even 1st gen PS2 games...True_Gamer_

Crysis is programmed just like any other PC game ever made. PC devs love doing things the way they always have in the past and will whine and complain the second somebody tries to make new hardware that works differently. The PS3 requires devs to program in a way totally different from what they are used and THAT is why they have so much problems with it. They will learn it over time, but for right now they just find it difficult and a pain and not worth the trouble.

What was the cell made for if not for games?

Dahaka-UK

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"]a $170 CPU http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115030 maxes Crysis? If the Cell was so strong in games applications then Crysis would require a Quad core....and as we see theer wont be a game that comes even close to Crysis in sheer calculations (Physics/AI/destructable enviroment/scale) in the next 5 years or even never I cant not be surprised how things changed since 2000 and PS2...then the first P4 costed $900 and was under heavy load to compare to even 1st gen PS2 games...ZIMdoom

Crysis is programmed just like any other PC game ever made. PC devs love doing things the way they always have in the past and will whine and complain the second somebody tries to make new hardware that works differently. The PS3 requires devs to program in a way totally different from what they are used and THAT is why they have so much problems with it. They will learn it over time, but for right now they just find it difficult and a pain and not worth the trouble.

You also have a good point. Unlike PC procressors, the Cell requires new techniques for processing. No longer do you have 1 or 2 main processing cores, you have 1 processing core with 6 other processing units that can crunch numbers like no tomorrow. You put them all in one working system you have one powerful peice of hardware.

If the cell wasn't stripped down so much it would even be more powerful than it is now.

What we are seeing in PS3 games is not the Cell holding devs back but the RSX and the ram. The RSX needs to work in parallel with the Cell to preform at its best and until now the RAM has been a major bottle neck. Luckly Sony has released new menthods that allow developers to pool the RAM in the PS3.

You clearly haven't seen this: http://kotaku.com/gaming/science/astrophysicist-replaces-supercomputer-with-eight-playstation-3s-311792.phpVandalvideo

Holy crap I didn't know the PS3 could process that fast!

You clearly haven't seen this: http://kotaku.com/gaming/science/astrophysicist-replaces-supercomputer-with-eight-playstation-3s-311792.phpVandalvideo

Cool, but what possesed Sony to use it in a games console? :I

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]You clearly haven't seen this: http://kotaku.com/gaming/science/astrophysicist-replaces-supercomputer-with-eight-playstation-3s-311792.phpMeu2k7

To TC, why do you keep making threads bashing consoles? Its agains the hermit code :P

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"]a $170 CPU http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115030 maxes Crysis? If the Cell was so strong in games applications then Crysis would require a Quad core....and as we see theer wont be a game that comes even close to Crysis in sheer calculations (Physics/AI/destructable enviroment/scale) in the next 5 years or even never I cant not be surprised how things changed since 2000 and PS2...then the first P4 costed $900 and was under heavy load to compare to even 1st gen PS2 games...Wasdie

Crysis is programmed just like any other PC game ever made. PC devs love doing things the way they always have in the past and will whine and complain the second somebody tries to make new hardware that works differently. The PS3 requires devs to program in a way totally different from what they are used and THAT is why they have so much problems with it. They will learn it over time, but for right now they just find it difficult and a pain and not worth the trouble.

You also have a good point. Unlike PC procressors, the Cell requires new techniques for processing. No longer do you have 1 or 2 main processing cores, you have 1 processing core with 6 other processing units that can crunch numbers like no tomorrow. You put them all in one working system you have one powerful peice of hardware.

If the cell wasn't stripped down so much it would even be more powerful than it is now.

What we are seeing in PS3 games is not the Cell holding devs back but the RSX and the ram. The RSX needs to work in parallel with the Cell to preform at its best and until now the RAM has been a major bottle neck. Luckly Sony has released new menthods that allow developers to pool the RAM in the PS3.

BUt I think people who complain about the RAM are falling into the same trap as developers...they are thinking for old hardwareinstead of new hardware. I think the only "bottleneck" is the complexity of the hardware. I think the PS3 is capable of producing amazing textures and graphics. From what I've seen of Little Big PLanet, it has the best and most realistic textures of any game I've ever seen. So clearly, the PS3 is capable of doing great things.

The PROBLEM is that the PS3 is extremely complicated. Aside from the Cells 7 sepereate processors which force devs to break their data up into chunks to be assembled later on when needed...which is hard enough...developers also have to bounce data between the Cell and RSX. I'm not a developer and what little I know about the PS3 hardware is enough to give me a headache.

As I said though. I don't believe there is an actual bottleneck, as people claim. I think the bottleneck is caused by people who want to program in typical PC style and then try to squeeze that behaviour onto the PS3. I just won't work. They need to start from scratch to properly use the hardware and get the most out of it.

Which leads to a new problem. Most games are developers from scratch for every console. Devs make one "main" version and then port it. This is why so many multiplats aren't considered as good for PS3...because they are mainly developed for the 360. This is also why so many devs port PS2 games with crappy controls to the Wii...it's quicker and cheaper than starting from scratch.

[QUOTE="Meu2k7"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]You clearly haven't seen this: http://kotaku.com/gaming/science/astrophysicist-replaces-supercomputer-with-eight-playstation-3s-311792.phpVandalvideo

probably to speed up the processes of making it cheaper so they can mass produce it for other electronics.

The PC version of FEAR with graphics maxed gives most PS3 games a run for their money and a two year old PC can run that. Teh cell is all hype because it's limited by less than 256 MB of RAM. The GPU uses the other 256 MB.

The Cell just like the Xenos are both extremely stripped down processors to decrease production costs and beable to make them affordable.

If would would take a Cell processor clocked at 3.2ghz but built for the PC, it would run circles around the PS3 one. Just like my Duo Core runs circles around the Xenos in the 360.

They still have extreme amounts of power, but to keep costs down they have to strip them down considerably.

Wasdie

LOL you do realize the Xenos is the gpu not the cpu

Its modified I believe ati radeon x1800

And yourdual core cpu will not run circles around the the tri core cpu in the 360, sorry but I just had to say it.

The fact of the matter is this game will never look anywheres near as good as a pc version, however if the devs did take time with it theycould make the game look good enough to satisfy people who own consoles.

I played the beta and it is fun, but seriously its not like the best shooter ever, however I do believe this game will lead the pack on what we will expect our fps to look like in the near future.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

The Cell just like the Xenos are both extremely stripped down processors to decrease production costs and beable to make them affordable.

If would would take a Cell processor clocked at 3.2ghz but built for the PC, it would run circles around the PS3 one. Just like my Duo Core runs circles around the Xenos in the 360.

They still have extreme amounts of power, but to keep costs down they have to strip them down considerably.

heatherhalifax

LOL you do realize the Xenos is the gpu not the cpu

Its modified I believe ati radeon x1800

And yourdual core cpu will not run circles around the the tri core cpu in the 360, sorry but I just had to say it.

The fact of the matter is this game will never look anywheres near as good as a pc version, however if the devs did take time with it theycould make the game look good enough to satisfy people who own consoles.

I played the beta and it is fun, but seriously its not like the best shooter ever, however I do believe this game will lead the pack on what we will expect our fps to look like in the near future.

I'm sorry, but the G5-based cores in the 360 cannot run "out-of-order" code like their more powerful G5 brethren can making them much more difficult to run certain types of code on and multitasks. The PS3 has the same problem with its core G5-based processor also. That is why the Xenon costs 100 dollars when it was first produced compared to well over a hundred dollars for a Core 2 Duo nearly two years later.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

The Cell just like the Xenos are both extremely stripped down processors to decrease production costs and beable to make them affordable.

If would would take a Cell processor clocked at 3.2ghz but built for the PC, it would run circles around the PS3 one. Just like my Duo Core runs circles around the Xenos in the 360.

They still have extreme amounts of power, but to keep costs down they have to strip them down considerably.

heatherhalifax

LOL you do realize the Xenos is the gpu not the cpu

Its modified I believe ati radeon x1800

And yourdual core cpu will not run circles around the the tri core cpu in the 360, sorry but I just had to say it.

The fact of the matter is this game will never look anywheres near as good as a pc version, however if the devs did take time with it theycould make the game look good enough to satisfy people who own consoles.

I played the beta and it is fun, but seriously its not like the best shooter ever, however I do believe this game will lead the pack on what we will expect our fps to look like in the near future.

You really believe that its about core numbers?What about cache? FSB? A C2D6550 destroys the 360 processor any day of the week...

cell was not made just for gaming, yes cell is powerful but some people fail to see its not built exclusively for gaming it has other functionsmingo123

Amen i was saying that for a while now The Cell ever never designed with PS3 in mind they just decided to use that IP.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

The Cell just like the Xenos are both extremely stripped down processors to decrease production costs and beable to make them affordable.

If would would take a Cell processor clocked at 3.2ghz but built for the PC, it would run circles around the PS3 one. Just like my Duo Core runs circles around the Xenos in the 360.

They still have extreme amounts of power, but to keep costs down they have to strip them down considerably.

heatherhalifax

LOL you do realize the Xenos is the gpu not the cpu

Its modified I believe ati radeon x1800

And yourdual core cpu will not run circles around the the tri core cpu in the 360, sorry but I just had to say it.

The fact of the matter is this game will never look anywheres near as good as a pc version, however if the devs did take time with it theycould make the game look good enough to satisfy people who own consoles.

I played the beta and it is fun, but seriously its not like the best shooter ever, however I do believe this game will lead the pack on what we will expect our fps to look like in the near future.

Xenon does prob. have more raw floating point power, but ore 2 will more then likely beat it in everything else...

As for Xenos, its not a modified anything, it was it's own design. Power wise however it is slightly more powerful then a 1800XT at 720p resolution.

The Cell just like the Xenos are both extremely stripped down processors to decrease production costs and beable to make them affordable.

If would would take a Cell processor clocked at 3.2ghz but built for the PC, it would run circles around the PS3 one. Just like my Duo Core runs circles around the Xenos in the 360.

They still have extreme amounts of power, but to keep costs down they have to strip them down considerably.

Wasdie

I'm through talking about this with people who have no idea how computers or processors work. Teufelhuhn

a $170 CPU http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115030 maxes Crysis? If the Cell was so strong in games applications then Crysis would require a Quad core....and as we see theer wont be a game that comes even close to Crysis in sheer calculations (Physics/AI/destructable enviroment/scale) in the next 5 years or even never I cant not be surprised how things changed since 2000 and PS2...then the first P4 costed $900 and was under heavy load to compare to even 1st gen PS2 games...True_Gamer_

wtf ru talking about Crysis isnt maxed by a dual core.. LOL you need high quad core, and the cell has been proven 5 times faster than a 2xquad core

The Cell just like the Xenos are both extremely stripped down processors to decrease production costs and beable to make them affordable.

If would would take a Cell processor clocked at 3.2ghz but built for the PC, it would run circles around the PS3 one. Just like my Duo Core runs circles around the Xenos in the 360.

They still have extreme amounts of power, but to keep costs down they have to strip them down considerably.

Wasdie

[QUOTE="mingo123"]cell was not made just for gaming, yes cell is powerful but some people fail to see its not built exclusively for gaming it has other functionsNugtoka

Amen i was saying that for a while now The Cell ever never designed with PS3 in mind they just decided to use that IP.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

The Cell just like the Xenos are both extremely stripped down processors to decrease production costs and beable to make them affordable.

If would would take a Cell processor clocked at 3.2ghz but built for the PC, it would run circles around the PS3 one. Just like my Duo Core runs circles around the Xenos in the 360.

They still have extreme amounts of power, but to keep costs down they have to strip them down considerably.

Teufelhuhn

Well I think the argument was due to the fact that Core 2's pipelines are much beefier then the Power CPU in Cell or 360, and if I'm correct can do more per clock (Except for floating point operations).

I don't remember what the G5's in the computer world looked like, but I know they differ in design from the console ones. But you have a poin, reguardless...it comes down to programming code. They might not nearly as broad in performance to a Core 2, but they wern't designed too. Cell may not have been a gaming CPU in the first place, but Xenon was spec'd to be one.